Agency (1981)

In this era of MAD MEN, people are taking a longer look at Madison Avenue advertising agencies and what they did in years gone by. Well, this rare 1980 film starring Robert Mitchum, issued as MIND GAMES, which exists only on video and has not been issued on DVD, should be of interest to anyone making a real study of this subject. Mitchum is as good as ever as the mysterious new boss ('with no background in the advertising business' as people mutter darkly to themselves) of an ad agency which he has just bought at a ridiculously high price. It turns out that Mitchum is up to no good. He eventually admits that he is amply funded by an anonymous group of the financial elite to insert subliminal messages into the ads of commercial sponsors, in order to influence elections. He has just turned round a US Senate race in Arizona by this means, and brought about the defeat of a liberal Senator named Grunsky. I noticed in the credits at the end that Alicia Grunsky was an assistant art director of the film, so this must have been an 'in joke' of the production team. The 'hero' of the story is the creative director of the ad agency, a Jon Hamm figure, who discovers the truth and struggles to stop Mitchum's diabolical plans to manipulate the public and eventually manufacture a president of the sinister elite's choice. Unfortunately, Majors wears one of the most offensively manicured beards imaginable, and is the very image of strutting male vanity, so it is impossible to warm to him. His girl friend is a pathetic, whimpering creature played by Valerie Perrine. Spare us! The only engaging and likable character in the film is an agency employee played by the amusing Saul Rubinek, but he gets killed by Mitchum's goons early in the story, his body stuffed into a refrigerator. The film is based on a novel called AGENCY by Paul Gottlieb, whose other filmed work in 1978 was IN PRAISE OF OLDER WOMEN. The actress Alexandra Stewart appeared in the earlier film and is very effective in AGENCY as well, as Mitchum's sinister and glamorous deputy. Stewart, Canadian by origin, was an alluring ingénue in the sixties in many British films and is still working, having appeared in an astounding 134 titles. She has often specialised in the restrained, aloof, seductive female characters who don't give anything away (except from time to time their virtue). This film is interesting if you are interested. Mitchum glides through it with his usual aplomb, smoothing the wrinkles out of the story by making everything seem convincing, due to his quiet, menacing dominance not only of the agency but of the screen as well.

I was actually being quite generous with the stars on this one. The quality of this video was really about 2 stars, but the original author and actors deserved better than that.Spoilers! So don't read further unless you want to know what the movie was about.A much better movie with a similar theme would be "Looker" with Susan Dey. Both movies are about subliminal messages in TV advertising with murders and subterfuge.They had a good idea with this story. I'm sure the original author was mortified when he saw what was done with his story. Even with Mitchum and Majors, this director, producer and film crew managed to destroy this movie. It could have been quite good but I was in shocked disbelief from the moment the movie started until the very end.I strongly suspect that Mitchum and Majors had no idea how bad this movie was going to turn out until after it was processed. I'm sure they were both horrified with the results. It wasn't their fault. It might have been a good movie with a completely different film crew and film executives.Bad sound; bad script & screen writing; bad directing; bad lighting; bad camera work; bad video quality; bad transfer; bad dialogue...The screen writing was a disaster. When it started out with that "no sweat" commercial in demonic attire... I actually grabbed the DVD box because I thought it was some kind of drag p0rn0 based on the opening scene. I somehow pictured the entire theater emptying out with this scene. There was no excuse for the way this script was written and laid out.I'm not sure they used a script for this movie. I think they just decided on a scene the night before and handed out the dialogue just before each shot. I really felt sorry for the actors. They really did their best. From the sound, there was obviously no "voice over" to clean up the sound of the dialogue, what little there was of it.Bad directing of the worst kind. I really mean this quite literally when I say a high school kid could have done a better job with a hand held camera in their garage. A 12 year old could have done better... and I'm not sure where the producer was hiding out while all of this was taking place.The sound quality was so terrible and distorted, we could have used a cassette recorder in a purse and done a better job with the sound. It was painful just to attempt to listen to this butchered, difficult to understand sound track. It was muffled, distorted and constantly fluctuating.The video and lighting were terrible. It was dark. The quality was worse than a 1950's TV show. There was no semblance of professional lighting. I mean this quite literally. I'm not being unkind. The cameras looked like old hand-held 1960's TV cameras which required extremely bright, hot lights to obtain a decent image.When there was something to see... such as the suicide in the refrigerator... the director did not have the camera stay on it long enough for you to absorb what you were seeing. But the ridiculous notion that someone would have killed himself by clearing out the refrigerator, cramming inside, then leaving a note was dumb enough. But the added disbelief that the police detectives didn't see anything suspicious about the situation was simply too much to bear.Then we had the same "suicide" victim leave a reel to reel recording of about 6 scenes of the movie... really sounded more like something we would expect to hear from a director on planning out scenes to be filmed and then ran out of money. So, instead of filming the scenes, they had this character record the details of what was going on at the Ad Agency as if he had tracked down the entire plot of the movie. We also could not understand half of what he was saying due to the bad soundtrack. A cheap way to do half of the movie without filming it.As for the graphics on the subliminal messages in the commercials, the core plot of the movie, it was so childish, nightmarish and filled with ridiculous roars and distorted sound… not to mention "crayon style animations" (no kidding), I could not believe my eyes.If you watch the movie "Looker" you will see a much better rendition of subliminal messaging. "Agency" had the right idea... but did not have a film or production crew who could do this movie in a professional manner.I did appreciate the story the original author was trying to tell. And I did enjoy the efforts of the actors. I watched the movie for their sake... and I felt really bad for how they must have felt when they saw the finished product. I honestly don't know how this movie was ever printed and distributed for public consumption.If you have a choice... watch "Looker" instead. You will enjoy that movie. It was well done and had a similar theme with much better special effects. However, if you are intent on watching this movie, "Agency" then I would recommend having a couple drinks to wash it down. It is watchable if you can tolerate the terrible soundtrack and bad lighting.I would like to extend my apologies to the actors, their families and the original author of this story. If the movie had been handled by a different film company, crew, director & producer... and a better DVD transfer company... I think it could have been a good movie. It could certainly be remade into a very enjoyable movie but that would never make up for the duress the actors and the writer must have endured at the hands of this director and production company when they saw the final product.

In 1981 whilst visiting California I had a vacant evening. And so free from visiting friends and amusement parks and not wanting to waste the evening looking at four walls of a motel room or watch the novelty of 24hour TV (remember this was 1981 and TV in the UK still closed at around midnight) I ventured out to the local Cinema to watch "Agency". From the TV trailers this promised to be an exciting story of the deceitful nature of advertisers who manipulate and lie so as to entice us, the unsuspecting general public towards the products. The trailer certainly worked; unfortunately the movie itself was as far from the mark as I was from home. The whole of the story had already been told in the 30 second trailer and there was nothing added to it. Robert Mitchum's character was not given anywhere near the scope to fulfil the potential that such a Hollywood movie idol deserves and the character of Philip Morgan played by Lee Majors could have been played by any of a dozen or more actors. To sum up - this is without doubt the worst movie I have ever endured at a cinema. Having suffered the 94 minutes (are you sure it was only 94 minutes - it seemed like an awful lot more to me), the four walls of the motel suddenly began to have a certain attraction - and as for 24 hour TV!!!If you ever get the chance to see this film do yourself a favour - lock yourself in your house and throw the keys out of the window, tape up your eyes, plug your ears or better still stay in your room and look at four blank walls. The overall effect is the same but without the hassle and expense of going out.

I have seen Agency the first time on TV many years ago. Even the French version (done in Paris...) was not bad, but couldn't save it...Again Montreal passes for an American city (too oblivious that Place Ville Marie is shown too much here) in winter. And Lee Majors tried here, even with a beard, to get rid of the typecast of the Six Million Dollar Man he portrayed, along with Valerie Perrine who wanted to pump some gas in her failing career and Robert Mitchum, a veteran now condemmed to roles in bad films...The story's good, moving. But bad photography, poor editing (some scenes are too dark) and some weak performances spoil everything. At least Saul Rubinek steals the show here as the employee who tries to denounce the scheme but gets killed by Quinn's secret henchmen...Sad to say the least: even the interesting stories get some bad treatment. And you don't need subliminal messages to tell it...